Le jeudi 28 novembre 2019 à 14:59 +0900, Akira TAGOH a écrit :
> I suppose it would be possible to define some XML elements, that
> a yaml list or dict in the text node. I don't like this kind of
> syntax much, but that’s the only way I see to keep something XML-
> that scales humanly to the kind of list/dict we will need.
That's too bad. I don't want to mix them.
You're already doing it for
Except it's neither an XML nor a YAML list, it’s a one-of-a-kind dict
format that can not be parsed natively by any off-the-shelf XML or YAML
> 2. whenever hindsight shows the low-level sequence needed to
> achieve a
> generic goal needs tweaking, the whole configuration needs
> instead of just adjusting things at the engine level.
I'm sorry, I don't get it. can you elaborate more details and
The whole locale-specific debacle for example, where you've wanted for
years to try alternative approaches, and you can't because neitheir you
nor other font packagers have any wish to rewrite all existing files.
That's 100% due to a bad abstraction level in fontconfig, where instead
of telling the engine what locale a font file is good for (letting the
engine compute the appropriate priorization strategy), users have to
hardcode a specific handling strategy in their config files.